1 CGHC010270382026 2026:CGHC:31479 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 6602 of 2026 Shobhit Brahmankar S/o Rajesh Brahmankar Aged About 25 Years R/o Near Hanuman Mandir, Nayapara, Police Station Gole Bazar, District- Raipur (C.G.) ... Applicant(s) versus The State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Gole Bazar, District- Raipur (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Applicant(s) : Mr. D.K. Gwalre, Advocate. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Jitendra Shrivastava, Government Advocate. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 23/07/2026 1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 81/2026 registered at Police Station Gole Bazar, District- Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable AKHILESH KUMAR DEWANGAN Digitally signed by AKHILESH KUMAR DEWANGAN 2 under Sections 296, 351(2), 119(2), 3(5) of BNS. 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the applicant, along with the co-accused, Bajrang Chouhan allegedly abused the complainant with obscene language, threatened to kill him, and assaulted him with a helmet, causing a fracture to his jaw. On the basis of the complaint, an FIR was registered for offences under Sections 296, 351(2) and 119(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, and upon completion of investigation, the charge-sheet was filed before the competent Court. Hence, the bail application. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has not committed any offence and he has been falsely implicated in offence in question. He further submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case and has no nexus with the co-accused or the alleged offence, the prosecution's own case, including the FIR and the statements of the injured recorded on 02.05.2026 and 03.05.2026, attributes the assault only to co- accused, Bajrang Chouhan, and no specific allegation has been made against the applicant of inflicting the helmet blow that resulted in the fracture injury. He also submits that the only material against the applicant is the memorandum statement of the co-accused, which is not legally admissible and cannot constitute substantive evidence. Furthermore, the helmet was seized from the spot immediately after the incident, much before the applicant's arrest, and nothing incriminating was recovered 3 from his possession. Therefore, according to the applicant, there is no legally admissible evidence connecting him with the alleged offence. The applicant is in jail since 07.06.2026, the applicant has one criminal antecedent of the year 2023 under the IPC, charge-sheet has been filed and the trial is likely to take some time for its conclusion. Therefore, he prays for grant of bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel opposes the bail application and submits that the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case. He further submits that the applicant allegedly in co-accused, Bajrang Chouhan abused the complainant with obscene language, criminally intimidated him, and assaulted him with a helmet, causing a fracture to his jaw. So far as criminal antecedent of the applicant is concerned, the applicant has one criminal antecedent of the year 2023 under the IPC, therefore, the applicant is not entitled for grant of bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of offence, period of detention of the applicant since 07.06.2026, the fact that though the applicant allegedly in collusion with co-accused, Bajrang Chouhan abused the complainant with obscene language, criminally intimidated him, and assaulted him with a helmet, causing a fracture to his jaw, but 4 considering the fact that the injured in his statement recorded under Section 180 of the BNSS has categorically stated that the assault with the helmet was committed by co-accused Bajrang Chouhan, who alone has been named in the FIR, hence, the case of present applicant is distinguishable from that of the co-accused, Bajrang Chouhan, further considering the criminal antecedent of the applicant, which is one in number of the year 2023 under the IPC and the fact that the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 7. Accordingly, the application is allowed. 8. Let the Applicant-Shobhit Brahmankar, involved in Crime No. 81/2026 registered at Police Station Gole Bazar, District- Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 296, 351(2), 119(2), 3(5) of BNS, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties in the like sum to the satisfaction of the Court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law. (ii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient 5 cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, proclamation under Section 84 of BNSS. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 209 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 351 of BNSS. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law. 9. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court for necessary information and compliance. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) CHIEF JUSTICE Akhil